Ballot Measure 46 amends the Oregon Constitution to allow laws to be passed or amended that would prohibit or limit contributions and expenditures of any kind to influence the outcome of any election. Under the measure, laws could be passed that prohibit or limit how much an individual or entity can give to a candidate for state or local (but not federal) office or other political campaign and how much an individual, entity, candidate or other political campaign can spend to influence the outcome of any state or local election. (From Measure 46 Explanatory Statement.)
Vote “No.”
At first glance, Measure 46 looks like a good idea. After all, who doesn’t want to “Get Big Money Out of Oregon Politics!”? I don’t. Not if this is the way it has to be done.
If this measure passes, the government will be able to limit the amount you can donate to political candidates, political committees, and parties. No big deal, right?
The government will also be able to limit the amount, but also the amount you can spend on your own campaigning for an election. In other words, the government will be able to limit your freedom of speech in the most crucial area of all — politics!
Do you want to get some flyers printed up to hand out to neighbors, take out an ad on radio, TV, or the newspaper, or lease space on a bill board? Better watch out that you don’t run afoul of any new limits that get passed. Even expenditures on blogging, if you attempt to influence an election (like I’m trying to do here), could be limited.
And we don’t have to guess at what sorts of laws people want passed. Just look at Measure 47. In its attempt to take big money out of politics, Measure 46 could result in the little guy removed from politics, too, leaving just the professional media, more powerful than ever.
Please vote “No” on Measures 46 and 47.
Source: The Oregon Secretary of State publishes a Voters’ Pamphlet which lists all of the Oregon statewide measures, including ballot title, text of measure, explanatory statement (excepted above), and arguments in favor and opposition.
Related:
| Issue | blogan Recommends |
| Measure 39 | Yes |
| Measure 40 | No |
| Measure 41 | Yes |
| Measure 42 | No |
| Measure 43 | Yes |
| Measure 44 | Yes |
| Measure 45 | No |
| Measure 46 | No |
| Measure 47 | No |
| Measure 48 | No |
Measure 46 would put Oregon in the same position as the 49 other states in the ability to regulate campaign contributions. I’ve asked opponents to supply examples of artistic freedom being stifled in any of those states because of their ability to regulate campaign contribution. So far, I have not heard back from them. I don’t think I ever will.
Even Fair Elections opponent spokesman, Representative Peter Buckley, has admitted that something very like Measure 46 is needed if Oregon is ever to put limits on campaign contributions.
Money in politics is out of control. Oregon needs Measure 46.
If all Measures 46 and 47 did was limit campaign contributions, I wouldn’t object. Unfortunately, they also regulate independent spending. That’s limiting the amount you and I can spend on our own to influence elections, basically just limiting our speech. A democracy should not attempt to regulate, control, or limit political speech. Vote “No” on Measures 46 and 47.
Measure 46 allows regulation of “independent spending” only on the contribution side and in requiring disclosure of funding sources. If an independent campaign has received its money consistent with the rules, it can spend it without limit.
Tom, you’re wrong. Here’s why:
Measure 46 allows law to limit your and my expenditures, not just our contributions.
Why are you comfortable with an “independent campaign” having no limits on its spending while you would?
It’s bad law. Vote “No” on Measures 46 and 47.
Update: Tom, you’re worse than wrong — you’re either being intentionally misleading or stupid. I followed the link you provided. At the top right, is the following quote (emphasis added):
Maybe it’s not your website. Maybe you haven’t read it. Maybe you haven’t read Measure 46.
Maybe you should.